Harcum v. Benson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Traverse county to recover $950. The case was tried before Flaherty, J., who made findings and as conclusion of law ordered judgment in favor of defendant. From an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial, he appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
1. The trial of this case resulted in a verdict for defendant. On August 28,1915, an order was made denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. Written notice of the entry of the order was not given. On September 3,1915, judgment was entered for defendant. On April 26, 1916, plaintiff served notice of appeal from the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The appeal was too late. It is true the statute provides that an appeal may be taken from an appealable order within 30 days after written notice of the order from the adverse party. G. S. 1913, § 8000. But this right is undoubtedly cut…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bates v. HolbrookAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- American Button-Hole, Overseaming & Sewing Machine Co. v. GurneeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Noonan v. SpearSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Smith v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Banks v. GuinyardSupreme Court of Florida · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Lundblad v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Honeymead Products Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- In Re Estate of HoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- Marriage of Mingen v. MingenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. LundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.